"Britney Spears is an instrument of Satan" -- true, but is she also a reason to block same-sex marriages? Here's a column from...gulp...the National Review that takes some amusing potshots at the pop princess and her recent nuptial mayhem. I agree that the sort of "weekend wedding" values exemplified by this escapade don't exactly strengthen the American family -- but why is it that normal, non-celebrity gay people would do the same? The author argues, essentially, that "two wrongs don't make a right," i.e. neither Britney and Jason nor Justin and Jason should be allowed to wed. Check out this quote: "Things are for whom they are for. Voting is for law-abiding adult citizens of sound mind; marriage is for men and women; the fact that either institution might have been abused in some particular instance does not make a case for altering fundamental definitions."

Wow, that first sentence has a real air of authority and gravitas, doesn't it? Too bad it's baloney: who exactly makes this pronouncement of "whom things are for"? Not even 100 years have passed since American women were granted the right to vote -- before then, that second sentence would've read, "Voting is for law-abiding men of sound mind," with an implied "white" in front of "men." Sorry, but if we didn't get out there and subvert the dominant paradigm once in a while, we'd all still be fighting over the last slice of woolly mammoth steak. Thanks to Dan and his sometimes-guest-edited blog for this one...